Thursday, April 07, 2005

"Dead man, dead man. When will you arise?"

No, I'm not talking about that one.

"Cobwebs in your mind, dust upon your eyes."

After this and for a while, but not too long, I pledge a moratorium on Dylan lyrics. But following the weird scenes yesterday in St Peter's Basilica - particularly the sight of gentle Poppy clasping his hands in prayerful reflection - I can't get this one out of my head.

I feel like a dimensional traveller sometimes with respect to George HW Bush. In one reality, the one I see on CNN, he's a folksy yet dignified grandfather and war hero. In the other, the one I find in largely-unread books in the small hours, he's former President Hannibal Lector. Beyond the broad strokes there's not much shared between the two. The first is consensus reality, while the second, which lays an incredible count of both low and high crimes at his door, is never spoken in public. Can there be two Poppies? Could both be true? Or could so many be wrong, and so few right? It's hard to be arrogant about evidence which has persuaded me, when nearly everyone I know, and nearly everyone I don't, have no idea what I'm talking about. And I always need to embrace the humility that I could be mistaken.

Why should the word of a girl like Nelly Webb carry more weight for me than that of respected clergy and statesmen? Nelly claimed she was in the Franklin paedophile ring, and alleged she had seen the Vice President in the company of young boys at Lawrence King sex parties in Washington and Chicago. Or the testimony of Kimberly, which was much the same? Or Lisa's, "who came from a very underprivileged background with no knowledge of political affairs, [and] gave minute details of her attendance at political meetings around the country"? Or the report of an Omaha psychologist formerly employed by the CIA, who'd heard rumors when Bush was Director that corresponded with the allegations? The psychologist asked, "How do you investigate your boss?"And how can we, who have neither credibility nor authority, nor hope for either, expect to rightfully assess claims made against figures beyond the reach of common justice?

There are many names of people who had both, and lost both, by overreaching. Do you know the name Darlene Novinger? Googling it registers many hits from old "Clinton Body Count" lists. (Danny Casolaro's on the Clinton list, too.) I've already written about the gaming of partisan conspiracy theories. Let's be clear: there is not, really, a Clinton Body Count, nor a Bush Body Count. There is just the Body Count. It's not a competition, it's a consortium.

Novinger was recruited by the FBI in 1979 to work as an undercover operative, and in 1982 was assigned to Atlanta by the Federal Strike Force. She worked on Operation Nimbus, investigating large-scale drug smuggling on the Eastern seaboard. The investigation revealed the narcotics operation of a powerful Lebanese family living in Miami and Jamaica, which was also tied to the Lebanese fascist Phalange. And Novinger claimed the operation implicated Vice President Bush and his son Jeb.

Perhaps this is what Bush meant when, at the end of his debate with Michael Dukakis in 1988, he said "I've unleashed the Bush family on America." As John Judge remarks, "that has always been my image of this family, steeped in corruption, crime, and fascism that has taken over machinery of the country."

"Satan got you by the heel, there's a birdsnest in your hair..."

After submitting her report, orders came to cease the investigation and destroy all documents. She said someone in the FBI's Miami office leaked to the traffickers that she had penetrated the operation. Before Operation Nimbus was shut down, veteran US Customs investigator Joe Price filed corroborating reports in September 1983 implicating Bush. And after he did, FBI agents arrested him on a narcotics trafficking charge.

Rodney Stich tells more, in his book Defrauding America:

Darlene Novinger said to me that she discovered during an FBI investigation that George Bush and two of his sons were using drugs and prostitutes in a Florida hotel while Bush was Vice President. She said that when she reported these findings to her FBI supervisors they warned her not to reveal what she had discovered. Novinger had been requested to infiltrate drug trafficking operations in South America and the United States. She was pressured to quit her FBI position; her husband was beaten to death; and four hours after she appeared on a July 1993 talk show describing her findings (after she was warned not to appear), her father mysteriously died. A dead white canary was left on his grave as a warning to her. After receiving death threats she went into hiding, from where she occasionally appeared as guest on talk shows, and called me from undisclosed locations.

Darlene Novinger died of cancer in January, 2003. Another public official who overreached the common bounds of justice.

A moratorium on Star Trek analogies will be forthcoming. But I'm reminded of the "Friendly Angel" of a particularly frightening episode from the original series. He's a creature who appears to children as a powerful, benign ally, basked in light. But he's a deceiver - a mind controller who binges on misery - and though the children invoke him for play, he uses them as agents to kill their parents and destroy their world, and carry him to another planet upon which he may gorge.

It wasn't until the children confronted their grief that his spell was broken, and they could see his true face.

"Hail, hail, fire and snow, call the angel we will go..."

If ignorance is bliss, perhaps knowledge is torment. Because what can we do with it, but bear it?

1447 Comments:

Anonymous said...

I tend to lean toward the "evil" view of Bush 41 myself. However, if the guy is so powerful and diabolical, how does one explain the fact that he failed in his own re-election bid in 1992? Fellow Texan Ross Perot was clearly the spoiler that helped elect Clinton by a mere plurality. Or perhaps there was a plot to take out Perot that has yet to be revealed? I don't know, but just throwing out an intriguing question that begs to be answered...

It was asked: "if the guy is so powerful and diabolical, how does one explain the fact that he failed in his own re-election bid in 1992?"

He didn't fail. Like Sonny Liston, he threw the fight for a shill. Even at the time, Republican leaders were voicing great concern that Bush 41 wasn't really doing much campaining for re-election, and when he did, commentators from both sides noted how little effort was being put into it.

Why bother dealing with all the humdrum bureaucracy involved with being POTUS when it's far better to just install your own hand-picked replacement and sit back and enjoy your declining years?

That's exactly where Clinton came in. Clinton and Bush were old buddies going back at least as far as Clinton's involvement with cooperating with the CIA in their black-ops going in and out of Mena, Arkansas when Clinton was Governor. "Well done, thou good and faithful servant".

How does one choose a rational outlook on this thing? This whole, entire thing is so incredibly maniacal it seems, that it has become rather like a humongous blender full of every type of food possible, and the blender has been buzzed a bit, just enough to chew and mash everything into one giant enigmatic mess! How can you sit back and take some semblance of an objective view, when each and every trail eventually diverges into a dozen different conspiracies, each having it's own provocateurs; the Mason's, the Opus Dei, etc etc etc, on into ad infinitum ad nauseum! Ah, the Russian doll has expanded and imploded infinitely, into a morass of Hell for me. I find myelf wishing a savior. God help me.

I've always known instinctually that Clinton was working for some other agenda than the Democratic party. Who can forget his Mussolini-esque statement, "You cannot love your country and hate your government", in reference to Timothy McVeigh?

Even dullards on the street understand that during the Cold War the CIA employed spies (such as Lee Harvey Oswald) to join the enemy in deep cover, gain their trust, and then emerge when the time is right for the spy in their ranks to do some damage. Did no one ever think that they might do the same with the opposing political party?

Other Democrats, such as LBJ, have turned Benedict Arnold on their volition. "Just get me elected", he is alleged to have told an assemblage of JFK-hating Pentagon brass, "I'll give you your damn war".

When all this gets too much for my poor old head, I take my dog for a walk in the woods, and I *know* I'm closer to a Good Truth than all these sick and corrupt power-junkies ... if there's one thing I believe in, it's karma, and not doing harm. And that's all you really need to believe in. Somewhere along the line these Secret Corporate Politicians got infected, got hooked on the fact that they could do anything and get away with it; that nothing is true and everything is permissible. Where did that notion come from? In whose interests is it that certain elements of mankind pursue power and money at the expense of not only other humans but of the animal, vegetable, and mineral kingdoms? The very earth itself? We all die, and from that moment on, all bets are off. Life is short; WHY do "these people" do what they do?

"Can there be two Poppies? Could both be true? Or could so many be wrong, and so few right? It's hard to be arrogant about evidence which has persuaded me, when nearly everyone I know, and nearly everyone I don't, have no idea what I'm talking about. And I always need to embrace the humility that I could be mistaken."

Indeed. There are two. The public & the private. The spin doctors have kept the private from public view; that's their job. If you pull back the curtain be prepared to deal w/ what you find there. Stepping off from consensus reality has it's price. & y'get what you pay for.Some call it power politics. Realpolitik is sufficient.

"And how can we, who have neither credibility nor authority, nor hope for either, expect to rightfully assess claims made against figures beyond the reach of common justice?"

Use your common sense; check your sources. Follow the money. You have the credibility of your own integrity & love for truth & justice. More than enough.

Come you masters of warYou that build all the gunsYou that build the death planesYou that build the big bombsYou that hide behind wallsYou that hide behind desksI just want you to knowI can see through your masks

Let me ask you one questionIs your money that goodWill it buy you forgivenessDo you think that it couldI think you will findWhen your death takes its tollAll the money you madeWill never buy back your soul

"Fellow Texan Ross Perot was clearly the spoiler that helped elect Clinton by a mere plurality."

Gotta disagree - it really was Clinton. This is a thing that gives me hope: there really is a large part of this country that wants the things Clinton talked about, that wants things different than they are.

Regardless of whether he was a Trojan Horse Democrat (I have doubts), it's important to remember that people really do (or did; I think still do...) want a country that aspires to greater things and takes care of its citizens. Not, you know, a fascist dictatorship. Most people still don't want that, even if it's what we're getting.

And yes - I also think that Poppy more or less threw the match. Even taking the next step - that Clinton was recruited - it still gives some hope, given that to get elected, Clinton employed much populist progressive rhetoric.

Unfortunately I apparently got banned from DU for being too much of a conspiratorialist, I guess, --- but especially after some freepers imitating me on election night fraudulently signed on under my name and attacked people like Jeff Wells and Andy Stephenson and others.

The way these deeply deviant fascists work is to infiltrate everything and destroy whatever movements arise. Bad jacketing is part of the plan.

This blogsite, Jeff, has blown my mind with its fearlessness.

But - to anaonymous - the fact that Clinton HAD to be an ally of the Bushes in Mena airport Arkansas when he was governor there --and a friend to the Stephens group Arkansas mafia like the Bushes and apparently the Bin Ladens (to let the state police let the cocaine contra flights fly in and out of there) makes me believe that Bush "let" Clinton into power (only to help try to destroy him so that the "next phase" of fascism and a corrupt national security state like Nazi Germany could be implemented).

Carter, a Lockheed shill and Trilateral Rockefeller flunky like Nixon and Kissinger, was set up in the same way in 1976 by the right wing. Carter protected the fascists sort of but tried to change what he could as Clinton tried to do kind of until they destroyed him with Blaoickops in Iran and the October super surprise.

But I had to add this ---

I happened to rent the dvd for the X File spinoff "The Lone Gunmen".

The pilot show (released this week on DVD)--- first aired in March 2001 (6 months before 9-11-01 and 4 months before Jim Hatfield's article which resulted in his being suicided about the Bush-Bin Laden plot to fly remore aircraft into US targets) NAILS the story: remote flown aircraft were steered into the World Trade center's twin towers to promote war.

I used to deliver advertising circulars (TV Facts magazine) at the Twin Towers and have friends who were there that day (who survived).

To think that the X Files creators predicted" 9-11 with such chilling accuracy and blamed it on the "US national security state" just blew me away.

Up is down. Nothing is prohibited. Everything is permitted in the acquisition and protection of filthy lucre and mammon worship.

FOX broaast this scenario on its network six months before it happened.

It blew my mind seeing it on my little tv set that barelt gets decent color or sound. How did THETY figure this scenario out and the CIA and ther NSA and Condoleeza Lice did not???

I think this is the Fourth Reich.

We are living IN the 4th Reich where Hitler's premier backers, supporters and apologists, the Bushes, have taken over America.

And they have started WWIII from America intitiating the Fourth Reich globally as in the original master plan:

re: H. LectorThe book Hannibal's villain, Verger, is a faceless man living in D.C. powerfully connected, welathy as all get out, who consumes young poor children for release. Hannibal made him eat his own face. Hannibal Lector is not the bad guy.

Apologies for lack of clarity in my post: my question, "why do they do what they do", was really angling this way: if you want riches, power, a luxurious life for you and your family, status for yourself, whatever, there are innumerable ways of achieving this without harming others. Ambitious people do it all the time. It's called a career. You can get just about as rich as you want without actually being evil. This child-abusing cryptocracy; what carrots can they have dangled in front of them to make them behave in the way they do? How much money would it take for you to ritually abuse your own child? Put it another way: what "these people" are working towards is either a reward we don't know about or understand - something that is to money like heroin is to tobacco - or they are being controlled/warped by something/someone to act in that something/someone's best interests. Neither of these suppositions answers my question, just asks others; what is the nature of this reward? What is the nature of this controlling influence? Why is either necessary or happening at all?

if there is another resurrection, perhaps it will be the pope. honestly, i never meet him before. but his absence made me miss him much. we've lost one good man in this world...maybe the peace of heaven be with him

Nice Blog!!! I thought I'd tell you about a site that will let give you places whereyou can make extra cash! I made over $800 last month. Not bad for not doing much. Just put in yourzip code and up will pop up a list of places that are available. I live in a small area and found quitea few. MAKE MONEY NOW

Not what I was searching for, but none the less and interesting blog here. Thanks for putting it up. I've enjoyed reading alot of the text here. I got you bookmarked for the future, I'll be back.

My site is a bit different, some think it's odd. I guess it's a matter how you look at it. I have a mens male enhancement reviews related site. Most of the articles are on mens male enhancement reviews.

Veryyyyyyyyy nice blog i kinda like it coz it got alot of information that can be useful for me very informative you go guys and one thing more i got a site that i prefer to everybody maybe you will like it to go have a look in your free timeComputer home based business

Hello There, My name is Donald you have a great blog here! I'm definitely going to bookmark you! I have a how to make a lot of money site. It pretty much covers how to make a lot of money related stuff.